Am I the only one who finds LeFH to be better than ML-20? Not that I had much of a reason to use ML-20 when I have B-4, but I hate 120mm mortar and Katyusha when I am facing them, and counterbattery slays them well.
Anyone else?
And the poll is a bit too simple. Stuka needs a nerf for example, while something like the US Mortar Halftrack needs a buff.
I like how static artillery are implemented in this game. They are relatively cheap as they cost no fuel, but are not as destructive. They don't wipe reliably (B4 Precision Shot is another story, btw can anyone say if the ML-20 Precision Shot is any good? If yes I might try it for its superior barrage compared to B4 luck howitzer that can only vet up reliably if you build it up close which defeats the purpose of precision shot in the first place) against anything but colossal blobs, but they deny area, capture points, and deal solid damage and easily make up for the MP cost over time.
They aren't a must have, they aren't overly centralizing. Static artillery are an excellent example of how a doctrinal unit should be; they supplement you but they don't replace anything. If you want to really hurt a mob, you still go for a Katyusha/Panzerwerfer (if you're about to say that Panzerwerfer sucks, hold that thought, it works well for me and I don't want to discuss that) with their better scatter, mobility, and better response time.
the Stuka does not need a nerf, it's already been nerfed and it's OKW's only indirect fire unit (which is stupid). The B4 is not a random luck unit at all if you are using it correctly. And the 152 Howitzer is still far, far better than the LeFH if in just sure destructive power, and it only fires 2 less shells.
Precision shot on the 152 might not be as good as the one on the B4, but it still will wipe a army if you hit a HQ. |
Yes, because the leading cause of death for infantry are indirect fire and crushes, and not other infantry with laserbeams of doom.
4 man squads being easy to wipe is one of the reasons Ober's without the MG34 are perfectly fine balance wise. I can understand why Ober's are as good as they are tho, especially with the existence of rifle/shock blobs.
But yes you are actually correct, indirect fire is and deaths due to enemy armor are probably the leading causes of death for OKW infantry. |
KV1 is worse tank than T34/76.
Yes, it can bounce paks, pzfaust, schrecks.
Yes, it can more hp BUT
it's not spammable, you can't circle King Tiger, you cant reverse in a second. This is what makes KV1 worse than T34.
Wait so it can bounce all of those things, things which make the T34/76 unusable late game, and thus the KV1 is worse? What kind of backwards logic is that?
And of course you can circle a KT, the KV1 is far faster than it.
Ultimately the KV1 at the very least is a great damage soak and can help deter an enemies shrek blob. Iv found it to be immensely useful against Ostheer, as barring them getting a Pak43 (which means no call in tanks), or an Elefant (which I can just blow up with my B4 anyway), I can easily establish armor dominance.
And it's more spammable than the t3, you don't need to pay teching costs for a KV1. When I have a USF player supporting me I'll almost always go t0 -> t2 into call ins.
90% of the game's current problems would be fixed with giving debuffs to infantry that are close to other infantry (i.e. blobs).
Give all blobbed units + 25% to suppression, + 25% to damage from explosive weapons, + 25% to received accuracy and you fixed 90% of the meta issues. (To say nothing of this being realistic).
This instantly renders MG42 better at crowd control while massively decreasing the impact of Volks + Obers / Rifles blobs.
The other 10% of fixes are making call-ins depend on tech.
Simples.
this would make the game literally unplayable on 80% of maps. |
You should try it. A single Obersoldaten squad is a threat. Three Obersoldaten squads are unbeatable by any amount of infantry.
No I won't because every player I ever fight that does it get's spanked because they get MP drained like crazy. Ober's are 4 man squad which makes them very weak to crush and indirect fire.
cept it gets killed by 2 shreck hits
It's one of the most mobile tanks in the game, it's very easy to keep it out of shrek range.
OP is right, the faction itself is not bad, the problem lies in numbers. OKW was designed as a faction that is weak in early game, micro intensive in mid game and powerfull in late game. Problem is that due to low cost of teching and units their infantry is super spammable making them, after usf, 2nd best early game faction and patching their micro intensive, light vehicle based mid game with no-micro blobs.
That's why mp income reduction can solve the problem. The other idea could be to increase population and upkeep cost o their infantry especially on volks and obers. Again units themselves are ok, their numbers is the problem.
A MP reduction would only make OKW piss easy to beat early game unless the HQ starting units got a buff. OKW should have never had a resource reduction of any type, the units should have simply cost more. But if we have to live in a world with the fuel penalty then the price of tanks should be reduced fuel wise but have a BIG increase in MP cost.
So the Panther might only be 140 fuel, but your paying 800 MP for it as well. |
It's best used in team games honestly, but it's late game power is basically non-existant. |
Is there any proof that Relic stated that the Soviets are meant to be reliant on doctrines?
Or is it just a myth perpetuated by axis fanboys in order to make sure Soviets are always a badly designed faction.
Soviets ARE a badly designed faction, because the entire idea of it is literally callinmeta.FtN
It's not a myth, you can look at any of the Soviet doctrines and see how most are all based around call in's instead of passive addons/upgrades like Ostheer commanders. Ostheer commanders are meant to help augment and improve your existing units with a call in here and there.
This was kinda fine originally, as each faction was unique, but now we have 2 extra factions muddying everything up. Both the WFA factions have good stock units and their commanders fill holes in said stock list, a different design philosophy from Soviets or Ostheer. |
you missed a lot mate.
Iv played all the Dawn of War games to death, and all my friends moved to COH2 from DoW2:Retribution, so thus COH2 was my first Company of Heroes game. |
Because being able to kill a Panzer IV (not very reliable at all btw, Panzer IV can also bounce shots from it pretty often) makes it a good unit. Ugh.
Why are you changing your tune now? You were on board with making T-34/85 non doc. No matter, if you genuinely think that being doctrinal is what balances T-34/85, you're as clueless as you make yourself sound to be.
I was on board with it because I assume it would be part of rebalancing both the vanilla factions teching, but honestly dude the reason the T-34/85 is doctrine only is that is how Soviets were originally designed. Your supposed to rely on call in units, not stock units.
The KV1 in t4 and 85 in T3 could work, but you would to also drastically redo Ostheers teching and stock unit load out. |
> Penetrates nothing
"My KV-1 is doing nothing?"
Ostheer player, while using nothing but Panthers as tanks: "You're using it wrong, you're supposed to get SU-85 behind it, then it's good!"
And then you realize for all that fuel you could have gotten an ISU-152 or an IS-2 that's far superior in every way.
The KV-1 isn't as bad as you think it is, it can easily kick a Panzer IV's ass, and it can bounce shots from heavier tanks. It being a stock unit would be a pretty good idea, would make a lot more sense than giving soviets a nondoc T34/85.
|
If you weren't making such a BS statements I wouldn't.
Theory crafting is one thing, talking nonsense is other.
I ma done with you. If you decide to prove how much you're worth I'm always up for a 1v1 match. Just PM me.
You have yet to prove a single thing Iv ever said is BS, and why should I need to prove my worth to a person who won't even make the barest attempt at a debate? |